SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Raymond Duray who wrote (17041)5/16/2005 1:31:12 PM
From: tsigprofit  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20773
 
No Draft, No Way - what do you think of this Ray??
No Draft, No Way- NDNW was formed in the summer of 2004 by a group of veterans, students, activists, and youth who realized that the global military ambitions of both political parties had stretched the military to the breaking point, making a draft a definite possiblity.
nodraftnoway.org

I agree with their goals, and it seems this is the logical way to protest such an illegal war in Iraq...t

More:

No Draft, No Way now has organizers and activists across the U.S. We are determined to fight the implementation of the draft and to organize and support resistance if the draft returns. We are opposed to the draft in any form, including the "economic draft," which is already a reality for many youth. For that reason, we not only organize against the draft, but oppose military recruiting and ROTC.

We believe:

Youth have the right to resist conscription to serve in a war for empire. They have a right to refuse to be inducted, to refuse to register, and to defy the Selective Service System and any form of the draft.
Young people have the right to expose, resist, and drive off military recruiters who come onto their campuses or into their neighborhoods to lie to them and exploit their economic hardship in order to drag them away to fight on behalf of Wall Street.
Members of the military have the right to refuse to obey orders to fight in an illegal war of aggression. The antiwar movement has an obligation to support members of the military who disobey criminal orders.
To get involved or find out more, contact us at info@NoDraftNoWay.org



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (17041)5/16/2005 3:08:37 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20773
 
A Battle Over Programming at National Public Radio
_________________________

By STEPHEN LABATON
The New York Times
May 16, 2005
nytimes.com

WASHINGTON - Executives at National Public Radio are increasingly at odds with the Bush appointees who lead the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

In one of several points of conflict in recent months, the chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which allocates federal funds for public radio and television, is considering a plan to monitor Middle East coverage on NPR news programs for evidence of bias, a corporation spokesman said on Friday.

The corporation's board has told its staff that it should consider redirecting money away from national newscasts and toward music programs produced by NPR stations.

Top officials at NPR and member stations are upset as well about the corporation's decision to appoint two ombudsmen to judge the content of programs for balance. And managers of public radio stations criticized the corporation in a resolution offered at their annual meeting two weeks ago urging it not to interfere in NPR editorial decisions.

The corporation's chairman, Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, has also blocked NPR from broadcasting its programs on a station in Berlin owned by the United States government.

Mr. Tomlinson denied several requests last week to discuss the relationship between the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and NPR, but he issued a one-sentence statement saying that he looked forward to "working through any differences that may exist between our institutions." In a column last week in The Washington Times and in an appearance on Tucker Carlson's talk show on PBS, he repeated his belief that public broadcasting's reputation of being left-leaning was a problem.

Mr. Tomlinson has been waging a campaign to correct what he and other conservatives see as a liberal bias in public television programming. That effort has been criticized by leaders of public television who say it poses a threat to their editorial independence. At the request of two senior Democratic members of Congress, the inspector general at the corporation is examining whether Mr. Tomlinson's decision to monitor only one television program, "Now," with Bill Moyers, and his decision to retain a White House official who helped create guidelines for the two ombudsmen may have violated a law that is supposed to insulate public broadcasting from politics.

But the law also assigns the corporation the responsibility of ensuring balance and objectivity in programming, a function that Mr. Tomlinson says is of paramount importance for the sustained viability and political support of public broadcasting.

About a quarter of the corporation's $400 million budget goes to radio, with most of the rest to television. NPR recently received a huge bequest from the estate of Joan B. Kroc, the widow of the founder of McDonald's, and it gets only about 1 percent of its overall funds directly from the corporation. But its member stations are far more reliant on the corporation's money, and they use a significant part of that to buy programs produced by NPR and others.

Last month, the corporation's board, which is dominated by Republicans named by President Bush, told the staff at a meeting that it should prepare to redirect the relatively modest number of grants available for radio programs away from national news, officials at the corporation and NPR said.

"We heard sentiments from the board that they are interested in support of more music," said Vincent Curran, a senior vice president in charge of the radio division. He said that the board had made no final decisions on funds.

Participants in that meeting said there was a brief discussion by board members in which one of them, Gay Hart Gaines, talked about the need to change programming in light of a conversation she had had with a taxi driver about his listening habits. Ms. Gaines, a Republican fund-raiser and the head of the political action committee of Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, did not return a call to her office seeking comment.

In recent years, the corporation has provided funds for NPR programs like "The Tavis Smiley Show" and "Day to Day." A third NPR program, "News and Notes," recently applied for money. Mr. Tomlinson has told some board members that the corporation would no longer provide funds for "Weekend America," a public affairs program produced by Minnesota Public Radio, people briefed on those discussions said.

Over the objections of senior NPR executives, the corporation decided in April to appoint the two ombudsmen to monitor radio and television content. At a meeting in February, Kevin Klose, NPR's president, was told by Mr. Tomlinson that the corporation would have a liberal ombudsman and a conservative one, participants in the meeting said. They said Mr. Klose told Mr. Tomlinson that this idea showed a fundamental misunderstanding of both journalism and the role of an ombudsman.

NPR has had its own ombudsman for the last five years, and executives there say they are concerned that having two at the agency that provides funds for programs could lead to editorial interference.

The resolution from representatives of public radio stations that was presented at the recent meeting in Washington denounced the move, and called on the corporation to "refrain from interfering in constitutionally protected content decisions" and to act as a firewall to insulate public broadcasting from politics. The lack of a quorum prevented a vote on the resolution, but a poll of the more than 80 people there showed unanimous support for it.

Late last year, without notifying board members or NPR, Mr. Tomlinson contacted S. Robert Lichter, president of the Center for Media and Public Affairs, a research group, about conducting a study on whether NPR's Middle East coverage was more favorable to Arabs than to Israelis, Mr. Lichter said. He added that although there were follow-up conversations as recently as February, officials at the corporation had not moved ahead with the project.

A spokesman for the corporation, Eben Peck, said it had not decided how it would monitor coverage of the Middle East on NPR.

"We're still assessing and looking at various methodologies that would allow an assessment of NPR's Middle East coverage," Mr. Peck said.

Other officials said Mr. Tomlinson had heard complaints about the coverage from a board member, Cheryl Halpern, a former chairwoman of the Republican Jewish Coalition and leading party fund-raiser whose family has business interests in Israel. The corporation has also heard complaints from Representative Brad Sherman, Democrat of California.

Besides his role at the corporation, Mr. Tomlinson heads the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which supervises most United States government broadcasts overseas, including those of the Voice of America. He has continued the policy of his predecessors on that board of blocking NPR from putting its programs on a Berlin station that the German government gave to the United States in the early 1990's after reunification. NPR, which has a significant presence overseas, has long sought to enter Berlin, the largest radio market in Western Europe.

Mr. Tomlinson has instead favored programming offered by a European business executive that includes newscasts produced by the Voice of America, which is restricted by law from broadcasting in English in most European countries. German regulators are considering the two options.

In a 2003 letter to Senator Richard G. Lugar, Republican of Indiana and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Mr. Tomlinson suggested that it would further the national interest to use the station to broadcast programs by Voice of America rather than NPR.

Some NPR officials suggest that Mr. Tomlinson has a conflict of interest as the head of both the Broadcasting Board of Governors and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

"It certainly calls into question where his allegiance lies," said Tim Eby, chairman of NPR and manager of the public radio stations run by Ohio State University in Columbus.

Mr. Peck, the corporation spokesman, said Mr. Tomlinson "does not think there is a conflict of interest."

In an interview last week, Mr. Eby said NPR executives had been particularly worried because they were not getting full information about what had been happening at the corporation.

"Everybody has been concerned in a lot of ways because there's been a real lack of transparency about what's been going on there," he said.



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (17041)5/16/2005 4:19:01 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20773
 
Speech at conference assails right wing
__________________________

By Michael D. Sorkin
Of the Post-Dispatch
05/15/2005
stltoday.com

Bill Moyers denounced on Sunday the right wing and top officials at the White House, saying they are trying to silence their critics by controlling the news media.

He also took aim at reporters who become little more than willing government "stenographers." And he said the public increasingly is content with just enough news to confirm its own biases.

Moyers spoke in St. Louis at a conference on media reform. His reports have appeared on the Public Broadcasting System since the 1970s. He was an aide to President Lyndon Johnson and is a former newspaper publisher.

Moyers said those in power - government officials and their allies in the media - mean to stay there by punishing journalists "who tell the stories that make princes and priests uncomfortable."

Moyers described those officials as "obsessed with control" of the media. He said they are using the government "to threaten and intimidate."

Moyers answered for the first time recent charges that public television in general and he in particular have become too liberal.

Those charges are from Kenneth Tomlinson, chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and, in effect, Moyers' boss at the network.

Tomlinson, a Republican, paid an outside consultant $10,000 to keep track of the political leanings of guests on Moyers' show, "Now." Moyers left the show last year but is back on public television as host of the series "Wide Angle."

Tomlinson, on the recommendation of administration officials, hired a senior White House aide to draw up guidelines to review the content of public radio and television broadcasts, according to a report in The New York Times on May 2.

Tomlinson has denied that he was carrying out a White House mandate.

Tomlinson complained that Moyers' show was consistently critical of Republicans and the Bush administration. He said there was a "tone deafness" at PBS headquarters on issues of "tone and balance."

Moyers said he knew his broadcasts have created a backlash in Washington.

"The more compelling our journalism, the angrier became the radical right of the Republican Party," he said.

"That's because the one thing they loath more than liberals is the truth. And the quickest way to be damned by them as liberal is to tell the truth."

Moyers' speech was interrupted by standing ovations at the Conference for Media Reform here over the weekend. More than 2,500 people attended the three-day conference.

Ernest Wilson III serves with Tomlinson on the board that oversees public broadcasting. He said PBS outranks the Fox News Channel, CNN and all the broadcast news networks in a survey that asked whom the public trusts.

"We are, by far, the most 'fair and balanced,'" he said, a reference to the motto of Fox News.

Moyers complained that PBS' "liberal" label is undeserved.

"In contrast to the conservative mantra that public television routinely features the voices of establishment critics," he said, alternative voices on public television are rare and usually drowned out by government and corporate views.

Moyers said that's exactly what the right wing wants.

"They want your reporting to validate their belief system, and when it doesn't God forbid."

He said he always thought that the American eagle needed both a left wing and a right wing. "But with two right wings, or two left wings, it's no longer an eagle, and it's going to crash."

Moyers said right wingers had attacked him after he closed a broadcast by placing a flag in his lapel.

It was the first time that he had worn a flag. He said he put it on to remind himself that "not every patriot thinks we should do to the people of Baghdad what bin Laden did to us."

"The flag has been hijacked and turned into a logo, a trademark of a monopoly on patriotism," Moyers said.

Moyers had harsh words for reporters who simply recount what officials say, without scrutinizing what they say and do.

He said New York Times correspondent Judith Miller, among other reporters, had relied on official but unnamed sources "when she served essentially as the government's stenographer for claims that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction."

Moyers said he has come to understand that "news is what people want to keep hidden and everything else is publicity."

He said that kind of reporting has never been tougher to do:

"Without a trace of irony, the powers that be have appropriated the news speak vernacular of George Orwell's '1984,' giving us a program, no child will be left behind, while cutting funds for educating disadvantaged children.

"They give us legislation calling for clear skies and healthy forests" while "turning over public lands to the energy industry."

He said the public shares the blame:

"An unconscious people, an indoctrinated people, a people fed only partisan information and opinion that confirm their own bias, a people made morbidly obese in mind and spirit by the junk food of propaganda is less inclined to put up a fight - ask questions and be skeptical."

Moyers compared Tomlinson and other conservatives to Richard Nixon, who he said was another president who tried to take control of public television.

"I always knew Nixon would be back," Moyers said. "I just didn't know that this time he would ask to be chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting."

Moyers was a last-minute addition to the conference. He finished writing his hourlong speech 20 minutes before he spoke. His ending was nearly drowned out by a blaring fire alarm that went off by mistake.

The conference ended Sunday, and some who attended said they were still unsure what reforming the media means. Others said they were energized to go home and give it a try.

"It's true that no one laid out a battle plan," said Mercedes Lynn DeUriarte, an associate journalism professor from the University of Texas at Austin. "But everybody left understanding that we're at a critical point, where we must find a way to protect a democratic press or risk democracy."

Reporter Michael D. Sorkin
E-mail: msorkin@post-dispatch.com
Phone: 314-340-8347



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (17041)5/17/2005 7:54:15 AM
From: jttmab  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 20773
 
1) A TOTAL BAN ON ANY FORM OF ELECTRONIC VOTING.

I'd be happy with electronic voting if there was a paper trail for verifiability.

2) PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION MUST REPLACE FIRST-PAST-THE-POST VOTING

I don't know what FIRST-PAST-THE-POST VOTING means.

3) A TOTAL ABOLITION OF MONEY IN POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS AND STIFF PRISON SENTENCES FOR ANY LOBBYISTS ATTEMPTING TO PAY ANY MONEYS (in whatever form from golf tee fees to whore's hourly rates) TO OFFICIALS FOR FAVORS.

Political campaigns cost. Somehow money has to be involved. Where it comes from and how it's spent is somewhat open to debate. Successful prosecution of illegal political favors is difficult. Does the NRA buy votes or does it donate to candidates who support them? To establish the former beyond a reasonable doubt is darn hard.

jttmab



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (17041)5/17/2005 4:37:12 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 20773
 
The Memo That Won't Quit

washingtonpost.com

Check this line out...

Hedges and Silva write that the memo's "potentially explosive revelation has proven to be something of a dud in the United States. The White House has denied the premise of the memo, the American media have reacted slowly to it and the public generally seems indifferent to the issue or unwilling to rehash the bitter prewar debate over the reasons for the war."

But it's possible it's less a dud than a bomb with a long, slow fuse.